TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 904X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enuine gift. The assessee has proved the identity of the parties, creditworthiness of the donor and genuineness, therefore, the assessee has discharged burden casted upon him. It is further observed that no occasion is required to receive the gift by the assessee from his brother-Shri V.Bala Sudhakar. Therefore, the Assessing Officer is not correct in denying the gift received by the assessee is not a genuine gift. Under the similar circumstances, the assessee also received gift in earlier years, the same has been considered by the coordinate bench of the tribunal in assessee s own case [ 2016 (11) TMI 1039 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM] for the A.Ys. 2009-10 to 2011-12 and held that the gift received by the assessee is a genuine gift from his b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that on verification of books of account and financial statements of the assessee, it is noticed that the assessee has shown gifts of ₹ 12.53 lakhs from Shri V. Bala Sudhakar. The Assessing Officer asked the assessee to explain the source of gifts. It was submitted before the Assessing Officer that he has received a gift from brother-V. Bala Sudhakar who is living in Doha, Qatar. He is an employee in Qatar and his wife also employee and getting salary. The assessee has filed confirmation letter from his brother and also TT vouchers showing the amount deposited in cash at Habib Qatar International Exchange Ltd. and City Exchange, Doha, Qatar. The assessee also filed bank statements in which salary of Shri V. Bala Sudhakar is credited. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the addition as unexplained investment in the hands of the assessee. He further submitted that once assessee proved the gift received through banking channels, if at all the Assessing Officer is having any doubt, it is the burden on the Assessing Officer to prove that the money received by the assessee is of his own and not gift from his brother. In this case, no such exercise has been done by the Assessing Officer, therefore, the orders of the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A) are not correct in making the addition u/sec. 68 of the Act. He relied on the decision of the ITAT, Visakhapatnam Bench in assessee s own case in ITA Nos. 6, 8 10/VIZ/2015, dated 12/08/2016 and requested same may be followed. 6. On the other hand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that there is no occasion for the donor to give gift to the assessee. There is no gift agreement between the donor and the donee, therefore the Assessing Officer is of the opinion that the assessee failed to produce the creditworthiness of the donor, hence he treated the entire amount of ₹ 12.53 lakhs as unexplained investment of the assessee. In this case, it is a fact that the assessee has received gift from his own brother-Shri V.Bala Sudhakar, who deposited money in Habid Qatar International Exchange Ltd. and City Exchange, Doha, Qatar, the same amount is deposited in the HDFC bank of the assessee, Visakhapatnam. The assessee has filed bank statement of the HDFC Bank and also the details of the deposits made by the donor- Shri V ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eceived by the assessee is not a genuine gift. 9. Under the similar circumstances, the assessee also received gift in earlier years, the same has been considered by the coordinate bench of the tribunal in assessee s own case in ITA No. 6, 8 10/VIZ/2015, dated 12/08/2016 for the A.Ys. 2009-10 to 2011-12 and held that the gift received by the assessee is a genuine gift from his brother and the addition made by the Assessing Officer is deleted. Keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and also by considering the decision of the ITAT, Visakhapatnam Bench in assessee s own case (supra) we are of the opinion that the addition made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) cannot survive. Accordin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
